From: Tomasz Figa Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] dt: Add DT bindings documentation for SUNXI Security System Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 21:20:03 +0200 Message-ID: <5380F0E3.7020008@gmail.com> References: <1400771396-9686-1-git-send-email-clabbe.montjoie@gmail.com> <1400771396-9686-2-git-send-email-clabbe.montjoie@gmail.com> <201405241321.32147.marex@denx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: mark.rutland@arm.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux@arm.linux.org.uk, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, pawel.moll@arm.com, ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk, rdunlap@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, robh+dt@kernel.org, LABBE Corentin , linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, galak@codeaurora.org, grant.likely@linaro.org, maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com, davem@davemloft.net To: Marek Vasut , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Return-path: In-Reply-To: <201405241321.32147.marex@denx.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-crypto.vger.kernel.org Hi Marek, On 24.05.2014 13:21, Marek Vasut wrote: > On Thursday, May 22, 2014 at 05:09:54 PM, LABBE Corentin wrote: > > Missing commit message. Please fix this and send a V2. > >> Signed-off-by: LABBE Corentin >> --- >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/sunxi-ss.txt | 9 +++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/sunxi-ss.txt >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/sunxi-ss.txt >> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/sunxi-ss.txt new file mode >> 100644 >> index 0000000..356563b >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/sunxi-ss.txt >> @@ -0,0 +1,9 @@ >> +* Allwinner Security System found on A20 SoC >> + >> +Required properties: >> +- compatible : Should be "allwinner,sun7i-a20-crypto". > > Why sun7i-a20 ? Is the crypto unit different in other sunxi chips ? Can that not > be described by DT props ? A widely used convention is to define compatible strings after first SoCs on which particular IP blocks appear. It is quite common among IP blocks for which there is no well defined versioning scheme. Best regards, Tomasz